I think this is a valid concern regarding his offensive potential. All his goals seem to be those garbage goals. It seems he is not much of a goal scorer, nothing like Armia.

You're being ridiculous as usual. Being good in front of the net and putting the rebounds in is extremely important. Armia's moody and inconsistent despite his sniping skills and occasional determination to score those goals. Besides, Barkov's shot is far from bad, he just doesn't use it as often as he should.

I think this is a valid concern regarding his offensive potential. All his goals seem to be those garbage goals. It seems he is not much of a goal scorer, nothing like Armia.

Obviously he's not a goal scorer like Armia. But somebody has to score the dirty goals and I know scouts love the ability to score dirty goals, because that's how goals are scored very often, especially in NA (and this is even more true come playoffs).

Imo I don't see why he couldn't score 20-30 goals in the NHL, maybe even more. That might not make him a "goal scorer" in itself but doesn't mean he's a bad goal scorer.

Who cares if he scores garbage rebound goals, a goal is a goal, it's not like he has no shooting ability. He may not be a sniper like Armia but he still has 5 more goals then him and is 2 years younger, that's what counts. Anyone questioning the offensive potential of a 17 year old who is the best scorer on his pro team should slap themselves. Him picking up all these rebound goals just shows that he is smart and knows where to go to finish plays.

Barkov has 2G+3A=5P in 4 games after WJC and he is on 4 game point streak. It's incredible how consistent Barkov is for guy of that age. It's very typical that U20 players have deep slumps at some point of long season.

Barkov has 2G+3A=5P in 4 games after WJC and he is on 4 game point streak. It's incredible how consistent Barkov is for guy of that age. It's very typical that U20 players have deep slumps at some point of long season.

Well, for me it's okay. If Barkov's slump is 7 points in 6 games against the best in the world U20 when he's 17 himself, it's not that bad.

Him scoring those dirty goals is extremely promising for me. Positioning and quick hands will work in any league. Not saying he's Teemu Selänne but if you look up The Finnish Flash goals for example, you'll see that a big part of them look just very easy. For some, goalscoring is easy. Let's hope Barkov will be one of them.

He wasn't as impressive as Lindholm and Drouin regardless of the fact that he scored a higher point rate against "tougher" opponents. Posting the stats is just sugar coating it. The effort they put in out there, Lindholm's and Drouin's were far more imperssive that Barkov's.

He wasn't as impressive as Lindholm and Drouin regardless of the fact that he scored a higher point rate against "tougher" opponents. Posting the stats is just sugar coating it. The effort they put in out there, Lindholm's and Drouin's were far more imperssive that Barkov's.

Yes, but people talking Barkov's offensive potential. WJC was only one tournament and Barkov wasn't at even close in his best (MacKinnon wasn't ether in his best and didn't get much icetime), Lindholm and Drouin was. Still Barkov beat's them points wise.

Barkov has now in FEL almost PPG and don't be surprised when he get a chance to play EHT and he has also chance to play 3rd line center in Finnish WC team.

Barkov was excellent against Sweden, he really improved from difficult games against Czech Republic and Switzerland (and he wasn't poor in those games!!). But when Finland lost that crucial game, many people here in Finland say that "Barkov was poor and tired". If you saw Barkovs performance in this tournament and say something like that, you probably haven't seen many of his games in SM-liiga. He is not so visible all the time, but he makes little things properly, like a 37 years old veteran. And when he gets a little opportunity, opponent team is in big troubles.

Barkov is better scorer than Armia in SM-liiga because Sashas hockey sense is in different level. He can find the open slots where to score these "garbage" goals. Armia is better shooter of course, and he really scores when gets opportunity, but that's all. Barkov has that crucial ability too, but it's only part of his comprehensive package.

Yes, but people talking Barkov's offensive potential. WJC was only one tournament and Barkov wasn't at even close in his best (MacKinnon wasn't ether in his best and didn't get much icetime), Lindholm and Drouin was. Still Barkov beat's them points wise.

Barkov has now in FEL almost PPG and don't be surprised when he get a chance to play EHT and he has also chance to play 3rd line center in Finnish WC team.

Barkov was excellent against Sweden, he really improved from difficult games against Czech Republic and Switzerland (and he wasn't poor in those games!!). But when Finland lost that crucial game, many people here in Finland say that "Barkov was poor and tired". If you saw Barkovs performance in this tournament and say something like that, you probably haven't seen many of his games in SM-liiga. He is not so visible all the time, but he makes little things properly, like a 37 years old veteran. And when he gets a little opportunity, opponent team is in big troubles.

Barkov is better scorer than Armia in SM-liiga because Sashas hockey sense is in different level. He can find the open slots where to score these "garbage" goals. Armia is better shooter of course, and he really scores when gets opportunity, but that's all. Barkov has that crucial ability too, but it's only part of his comprehensive package.

Barkov wasn't even close at excellent at the game against sweden. Barkov played alot of PK in that game and seemed exhausted against sweden. Barkov was solid and great defensively but didn't stand out but neither did Lindholm who wasn't as good as Barkov in that game. Barkov was probably best player for finland in that game but wasn't even close at his best.

He wasn't as impressive as Lindholm and Drouin regardless of the fact that he scored a higher point rate against "tougher" opponents. Posting the stats is just sugar coating it. The effort they put in out there, Lindholm's and Drouin's were far more imperssive that Barkov's.

How was Drouin and Lindholm defensively compared to Barkov or in overall game?

Drouin was pretty suprise pick from HC and Steven Spott and little bit became behind the tree. Suprised all without any expectations was bright spot for team Canada. Supriser like that will get some people in his bandwagon pretty easily.

Lindholm was pretty unknown for NA people and in other posters before WJC. Only swedes knew something about him. He was on the radar in top 10 but people wasn't expecting much from him except for swedes. He played pretty good WJC as did whole swedish team.

Barkov came into WJC with alot of expectations. People expected him
to dominate like he wants and control the game like man among the boys. People expected him to be one of the best players on strong finnish team. People saw that Team failed so Barkov failed with the team in their eyes. The truth is that Barkov was the most hard working C on team finland. He had to kill stupid penalties which were taken by his team mates in the offensive zone, his linemates couldn't do any cycling game they lost the puck all the time which ended up as long pressure in the defensive zone where he had to work alot. After that he had no
Energy left in the shift. In FEL his linemates aren't as useless and he doesen't have to do everything like in this WJC team.

Put Barkov in team sweden with better linemates and much better cycling game and Barkov would be one of the top players in this tournament.

In my books Barkov was solid for guy of his age. Worked hard and tried his best. I expected him to be more involved offensively but with that team and linemates, workload i understand why he looked tired.

I wouldn't put much stock for the WJC's. Right now Barkov is on a hot streak in FEL and he'll be on top discussion for the draft.

Watch the game again and count how many times Armia lost the puck in the offensive zone. How he ruined finland chance to come back by taking stupid penalty in the offensive zone. Armia scored couple goals but otherwise in actual game Armia was bad.

Watch the game again and count how many times Armia lost the puck in the offensive zone. How he ruined finland chance to come back by taking stupid penalty in the offensive zone. Armia scored couple goals but otherwise in actual game Armia was bad.

Doesn't matter. Hockey is a goal-scoring game and Armia gave Finland a chance.

Doesn't matter. Hockey is a goal-scoring game and Armia gave Finland a chance.

Armia lost the puck in one goal in the offensive zone which ended up goal against, Armia took stupid offensive zone penalty on the PP when finland was trailing by 1 goal which ended up as Emil Molin shooting the puck in the goal which killed the game. If you include all the offensive turnovers Armia had an bad game. He gave the chance and ruined it by his bad plays.

Hockey is a goalscoring game but also defending the goal game. If you score 5 and your the reason of 6 goal against you have lost and win is all what matters.